Inquiring Minds Want To Know . . . 0
In the Diane Rehm show cited here, Michael O’Hanlon twisted himself into knots (or pretzels) to justify installing an American-backed dictator in Iraq.
A modest proposal from a few miles up the road: Why not replace Maliki with George W. Bush? The reasoning seems pretty iron-clad to me:
Why not? Bush clearly wants to be a dictator, he feels the law doesn’t apply to him, or his minions and that it’d all be easier, just as long as he was the dictator. Besides, if things keep up the way they are, pretty soon, there’s going to be more sectarian divide in this nation than there is in Iraq and eventually, Bush is going to have to liberate this country from itself.
